ICE cars also give diminished returns over the years. Those MPG figures quoted for cars only apply to new cars. As engines, gearboxes and wheel bearings wear, so the efficiency falls, and you get less MPG.

If you keep the car long enough, you'll have to have the IC engine switched or reconditioned.

Of course with an EV, when the time does come to replace the batteries you'll probably get a new set that's even better than the original, with a greater range. Because the technology will have improved in the intervening years.

I hope the guy qualifies for an award some time soon. A Darwin award.

It's just an analogy. One that illustrates that depth mapping doesn't give proper 3D.

Absolutely. But it's not still not 3D, it's 2.5D. No one said 2.5D wouldn't work for this application.

No, you'd only have the surfaces that are first hit with raytracing from the eye. That's not 3D. That's why it's 2.5D.

But that's exactly the problem that 2.5D brings. You don't know what's behind foreground objects.

You have that the wrong way around. Sacrificing profitability for market share is the dangerous route.

Apple is the biggest and one of the longest established companies in tech. They've always valued profitability over market share. There's no short-termism here.

No. Betting exchanges such as Betfair charge money on the transaction. Traditional bookies such as this make individual bets against punters, at odds that they themselves set. They can and do make a loss on individual bets. But they make more than enough on the winning bets to cover that.

Indeed. With a traditional bookie such as this, you can only bet one way. The true probability of any of these things happening is significantly less than the supplied odds suggest.

For the same reason they use spotlight and shade in theatre shows, and floodlights on a sports field.

If you want a utilitarian document recording a place or event, such as a traffic cop taking a picture of a illegally parked car, then you can't do better than having every pixel in focus.

If you want something with artistic merit then you can use focus just as you can use light and shade to draw attention to one part of the image, and away from the background.

Depends what you mean by 3D modelling. Looking further at the article, it's a depth mapping technique for each pixel. Which is more analogous to DOOM than Quake. Remember those restrictions? No bridges in the map, no tables. Just a single height for the floor and a single height for the ceiling at any map position.

As the OP says it's 2.5D not 3D.

Not quite. It was those that are active haters of Apple, or those who do click-bait blogs that said things like that. Most people without an axe to grind thought that Apple would probably be as successful with it's new tablet as it was with it's previous categories of smartphone and music player.

And those haters and click-bait bloggers were wrong.

This is different. I'm seeing the middle ground of non-fanboys and non-haters as being unconvinced by wearables. That's not the same as the iPad.

Samsung would swap places with Apple in a heartbeat if they could.

"Apple was particularly dominant, as it generated around $133 billion in profits, or just under 62% of the total. Samsung trailed far behind but still generated a healthy $56 billion in profits, or around 26% of the total."
http://bgr.com/2014/03/18/appl...

If you think marketshare is more important to a company than profit, then you don't understand business. Samsung is doing well compared to most mobile phone manufacturers. But they are far behind Apple.

But you haven't. Your attempts at analogy have failed. It's just as true in those other areas that rooting through the trash is not only pointless but counter-productive.

There's nothing wrong with FOIA requests for data, and other things that FOIA covers. But this has been to court and those things that are covered by FOIA have been released and not those that don't. So you have no FOIA argument either.

"Albert Einstein's step-daughter Margot had stipulated in an agreement with the Hebrew University of Jerusalem dating from 1984 that letters in her possession, inherited from her step-father after his death in 1955 would be given to the Hebrew University but should be kept sealed and away from the public's eye for 20 years after her death. By the beginning of 1986 the material had arrived in Jerusalem. Margot had passed away a short time later, in July 1986. By July 8th, 2006 the 20-year period since her death had lapsed. Now the time had come to make the letters available to the public.

Since then, all of the material, spanning from 1914 to 1955, is available at the Albert Einstein Archives in Jerusalem for the interested public."

There was no forced publication of Einstein's letters during his life. His family chose when to publish and it was long after his death.

Your analogy is falling so far off the mark it's funny.
http://www.albert-einstein.org...

Because you didn't have a mobile phone then and you do now?

The Federalist papers were specifically written for publication, every bit as much as the constitution itself was. They too are parallel to the papers published in scientific journals. They are not an analogy for the forced publishing of work in progress that was never intended for public consumption.